Meghan Markle, the Duchess of Sussex, is being accused of wearing a hidden microphone during the recent service at St. Paul’s Cathedral.
Army veteran Trevor Coultham C., who claims to have an extensive network of contacts, has boldly stated that Meghan was indeed wearing a microphone, providing a foundation for his assertion.
Although circumstantial, the evidence seems to support Mr. Coultham’s claim, as it appears that Meghan had a microphone concealed under the lapel of her coat, with a wire leading into her hat.
Throughout the event, she was seen fiddling with something under the same lapel on multiple occasions, both upon arrival and during the service.
The discovery of a possible microphone sheds light on the visible tension exhibited by the royal family as they left the cathedral.
Their demeanor suggested that they had received distressing news.
Additionally, the sudden and unexplained change in Harry and Meghan’s schedule, including their absence from the post-service lunch and the Platinum Party in the evening, raises further suspicion.
It is intriguing that no reason was provided for their unexpected withdrawal from these events, which one would assume they would have eagerly attended.
If Meghan did indeed wear a covert recording device, it would explain her self-satisfied smirk while inside the church, knowing that she was breaking the rules in front of millions.
This is not the first time she has been associated with secret recordings, as she was previously caught making them within the palace upon her arrival.
Furthermore, Harry and Meghan were asked to leave the UN building in New York for attempting to covertly record, indicating a pattern of behavior.
Considering that Netflix has reportedly signed a lucrative deal with the couple, estimated to be between 50 and 100 million dollars, to produce original content, it is plausible that they have access to state-of-the-art recording devices.
The threat of covert recordings was a concern raised when the couple’s invitation to the jubilee celebration was being considered.
As a result, preventive measures and detection equipment would likely have been deployed.
Major Johnny Thompson Colorado of Balaclava Company, the Scots Guard, the Queen’s bodyguards, and the Lord Chamberlain, head of palace security, were positioned immediately behind Harry and Meghan during the service.
If any white noise from radio transmissions emanating from the congregation was detected, the Queen’s men would have assumed that the wire protruding from Meghan’s hat to her neck was part of a recording device.
This potentially incendiary information would have been swiftly relayed to the highest levels of decision-making, leading to the immediate withdrawal of invitations to the family lunch and the party.
In unrelated news, royal expert Richard Fitzwilliams discussed Harry and Meghan’s brief visit to the UK in an interview with US Weekly’s host Christina Garibaldi.
Fitzwilliams found it charming that the couple released a photograph of their daughter, Lilibet, also known as Lily.
He emphasized that their intention was never to overshadow the Jubilee celebrations, despite the extensive media coverage leading up to the event.
Vanity Fair’s Kate Nicholl speculated that the couple’s early departure may have been influenced by the fact that they were not seated in the front row, suggesting they sought more prominent positions.
Historian Hugo Vickers added that Harry’s decision to give up his role as captain of the Royal Marines, who were prominently present during the festivities, likely left him feeling despondent.
Royal biographer Duncan Larcombe concluded that these four days would forever haunt Prince Harry, as he and his family were seemingly relegated to lesser positions, while other minor non-working royals occupied more prominent roles.
As the controversy surrounding Meghan Markle’s alleged hidden microphone unfolds, it remains to be seen whether these claims hold any truth.
The royal family’s reaction, the sudden change in schedule, and Meghan’s previous involvement with secret recordings certainly raise eyebrows.
However, until concrete evidence emerges, the speculation surrounding this incident will continue to captivate the public’s attention.
